World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Neuroscience

D-Index
64
Citations
37141
World Ranking
3197
National Ranking
184

Ingrid S. Johnsrude publication distribution in Neuroscience in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Neuroscience in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Ingrid S. Johnsrude sits on this spectrum.

38–47 publications: 18 scientists 48–57 publications: 79 scientists 58–67 publications: 193 scientists 68–77 publications: 323 scientists 78–87 publications: 406 scientists 88–97 publications: 452 scientists 98–107 publications: 539 scientists 108–117 publications: 505 scientists 118–127 publications: 522 scientists 128–137 publications: 469 scientists 138–147 publications: 456 scientists 148–157 publications: 459 scientists 158–167 publications: 397 scientists 168–177 publications: 383 scientists 178–187 publications: 350 scientists 188–197 publications: 302 scientists 198–207 publications: 306 scientists 208–217 publications: 262 scientists 218–227 publications: 242 scientists 228–237 publications: 220 scientists 238–247 publications: 203 scientists 248–257 publications: 174 scientists 258–267 publications: 176 scientists 268–277 publications: 175 scientists 278–287 publications: 125 scientists 288–297 publications: 116 scientists 298–307 publications: 127 scientists 308–317 publications: 128 scientists 318–327 publications: 99 scientists 328–337 publications: 89 scientists 338–347 publications: 78 scientists 348–357 publications: 96 scientists 358–367 publications: 66 scientists 368–377 publications: 59 scientists 378–387 publications: 65 scientists 388–397 publications: 54 scientists 398–407 publications: 48 scientists 408–417 publications: 49 scientists 418–427 publications: 34 scientists 428–437 publications: 31 scientists 438–447 publications: 30 scientists 448–457 publications: 31 scientists 458–467 publications: 36 scientists 468–477 publications: 40 scientists 478–487 publications: 35 scientists 488–497 publications: 30 scientists 498–507 publications: 23 scientists 508–517 publications: 26 scientists 518–527 publications: 20 scientists 528–537 publications: 23 scientists 538–547 publications: 20 scientists 548–557 publications: 20 scientists 558–567 publications: 17 scientists 568–577 publications: 14 scientists 578–587 publications: 20 scientists 588–597 publications: 20 scientists 598–607 publications: 19 scientists 608–617 publications: 18 scientists 618–627 publications: 17 scientists 628–637 publications: 11 scientists 638–647 publications: 11 scientists 648–657 publications: 11 scientists 658–667 publications: 8 scientists 668–677 publications: 7 scientists 678–687 publications: 11 scientists 688–697 publications: 10 scientists 698–707 publications: 4 scientists 708–717 publications: 6 scientists 718–727 publications: 5 scientists 728–737 publications: 5 scientists 738–747 publications: 9 scientists 748–757 publications: 9 scientists 758–767 publications: 3 scientists 768–777 publications: 7 scientists 778–787 publications: 7 scientists 788–797 publications: 6 scientists 798–807 publications: 2 scientists 808–817 publications: 2 scientists 818–827 publications: 7 scientists 828–837 publications: 0 scientists 838–847 publications: 9 scientists 848–857 publications: 3 scientists 858–867 publications: 1 scientists 868–877 publications: 3 scientists 878–886 publications: 6 scientists 887+ publications: 100 scientists
38 publications 887+

This scientist: 201 publications — 62nd percentile

62% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 887 publications or more.

Ingrid S. Johnsrude D-index placement in Neuroscience in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Neuroscience scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Ingrid S. Johnsrude sits on this spectrum.

30–31 D-Index: 42 scientists 32–33 D-Index: 172 scientists 34–35 D-Index: 296 scientists 36–37 D-Index: 435 scientists 38–39 D-Index: 459 scientists 40–41 D-Index: 456 scientists 42–43 D-Index: 467 scientists 44–45 D-Index: 478 scientists 46–47 D-Index: 512 scientists 48–49 D-Index: 435 scientists 50–51 D-Index: 425 scientists 52–53 D-Index: 418 scientists 54–55 D-Index: 392 scientists 56–57 D-Index: 357 scientists 58–59 D-Index: 334 scientists 60–61 D-Index: 328 scientists 62–63 D-Index: 260 scientists 64–65 D-Index: 278 scientists 66–67 D-Index: 239 scientists 68–69 D-Index: 250 scientists 70–71 D-Index: 210 scientists 72–73 D-Index: 200 scientists 74–75 D-Index: 189 scientists 76–77 D-Index: 170 scientists 78–79 D-Index: 146 scientists 80–81 D-Index: 113 scientists 82–83 D-Index: 126 scientists 84–85 D-Index: 100 scientists 86–87 D-Index: 84 scientists 88–89 D-Index: 99 scientists 90–91 D-Index: 84 scientists 92–93 D-Index: 85 scientists 94–95 D-Index: 72 scientists 96–97 D-Index: 76 scientists 98–99 D-Index: 45 scientists 100–101 D-Index: 49 scientists 102–103 D-Index: 43 scientists 104–105 D-Index: 32 scientists 106–107 D-Index: 45 scientists 108–109 D-Index: 50 scientists 110–111 D-Index: 32 scientists 112–113 D-Index: 39 scientists 114–115 D-Index: 32 scientists 116–117 D-Index: 29 scientists 118–119 D-Index: 27 scientists 120–121 D-Index: 19 scientists 122–123 D-Index: 23 scientists 124–125 D-Index: 27 scientists 126–127 D-Index: 16 scientists 128–129 D-Index: 24 scientists 130–131 D-Index: 13 scientists 132–133 D-Index: 21 scientists 134–135 D-Index: 17 scientists 136–137 D-Index: 14 scientists 138–139 D-Index: 15 scientists 140–141 D-Index: 10 scientists 142–143 D-Index: 10 scientists 144–145 D-Index: 13 scientists 146–147 D-Index: 9 scientists 148–149 D-Index: 8 scientists 150–151 D-Index: 6 scientists 152–153 D-Index: 6 scientists 154–155 D-Index: 7 scientists 156–157 D-Index: 7 scientists 158–159 D-Index: 10 scientists 160–161 D-Index: 4 scientists 162 D-Index: 8 scientists 163+ D-Index: 100 scientists
30 D-Index 163+

This scientist: 64 D-Index — 67th percentile

67% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 163 D-Index or more.

Overview

Ingrid S. Johnsrude is affiliated with the University of Western Ontario in Canada. Their research primarily spans the field of Neuroscience, with significant focus on Cognitive Neuroscience as well as Experimental and Cognitive Psychology. Their work also intersects with Speech and Hearing, Signal Processing, and Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging, reflecting a broad interdisciplinary approach.

The main topics investigated in their research include:

  • Hearing Loss and Rehabilitation
  • Neuroscience and Music Perception
  • Neural dynamics and brain function
  • Noise Effects and Management
  • Multisensory perception and integration
  • Phonetics and Phonology Research
  • Speech and Audio Processing

Johnsrude has contributed extensively to the scientific literature, with recent papers that highlight diverse aspects of auditory and cognitive neuroscience. Selected recent publications include:

  • "A model of listening engagement (MoLE)", 2020, Hearing Research
  • "Pupil Dilation Is Sensitive to Semantic Ambiguity and Acoustic Degradation", 2020, Trends in Hearing
  • "Pupil dilation is sensitive to semantic ambiguity and acoustic degradation", 2020, bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)
  • "Cortical Responses to the Amplitude Envelopes of Sounds Change with Age", 2021, Journal of Neuroscience
  • "Absorption and Enjoyment During Listening to Acoustically Masked Stories", 2020, Trends in Hearing

Their frequent collaborators include Björn Herrmann, Vanessa C. Irsik, Emma Holmes, Burkhard Maeß, and Sonia Yasmin.

Their research output is often published in venues such as:

  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)
  • Hearing Research
  • Trends in Hearing
  • Journal of Neuroscience
  • NeuroImage

Best Publications

  • A voxel-based morphometric study of ageing in 465 normal adult human brains.

    Catriona D. Good;Ingrid S. Johnsrude;John Ashburner;Richard N.A. Henson;Richard N.A. Henson

  • A voxel-based morphometric study of ageing in 465 normal adult human brains

    C.D. Good;I.S. Johnsrude;J. Ashburner;R.N.A. Henson

  • Navigation-related structural change in the hippocampi of taxi drivers

    Eleanor A. Maguire;David G. Gadian;Ingrid S. Johnsrude;Catriona D. Good

  • Somatotopic Representation of Action Words in Human Motor and Premotor Cortex

    Olaf Hauk;Ingrid Johnsrude;Friedemann Pulvermüller

  • Cerebral asymmetry and the effects of sex and handedness on brain structure: a voxel-based morphometric analysis of 465 normal adult human brains.

    Catriona D. Good;Ingrid S. Johnsrude;John Ashburner;Richard N. A. Henson;Richard N. A. Henson

  • The problem of functional localization in the human brain

    Matthew Brett;Ingrid S. Johnsrude;Adrian M. Owen

  • The Processing of Temporal Pitch and Melody Information in Auditory Cortex

    Roy D Patterson;Stefan Uppenkamp;Ingrid S Johnsrude;Timothy D Griffiths;Timothy D Griffiths

  • The neuroanatomical and functional organization of speech perception

    Sophie K. Scott;Ingrid S. Johnsrude

  • Hierarchical Processing in Spoken Language Comprehension

    Matthew H. Davis;Ingrid S. Johnsrude

  • The Neural Mechanisms of Speech Comprehension: fMRI studies of Semantic Ambiguity

    Jennifer M. Rodd;Matthew H. Davis;Ingrid S. Johnsrude

  • Lexical Information Drives Perceptual Learning of Distorted Speech: Evidence From the Comprehension of Noise-Vocoded Sentences.

    Matthew H. Davis;Ingrid S. Johnsrude;Alexis Hervais-Adelman;Karen Taylor

  • Identifying global anatomical differences: Deformation-based morphometry

    John Ashburner;Chloe Hutton;Richard Frackowiak;Ingrid Johnsrude

  • Hearing speech sounds: top-down influences on the interface between audition and speech perception.

    Matthew H. Davis;Ingrid S. Johnsrude

  • Functional specificity in the right human auditory cortex for perceiving pitch direction.

    Ingrid S. Johnsrude;Virginia B. Penhune;Robert J. Zatorre

  • A review of causal mechanisms underlying the link between age-related hearing loss and cognitive decline.

    Rachel V. Wayne;Ingrid S. Johnsrude

  • Representation of the temporal envelope of sounds in the human brain

    Anne-Lise Giraud;Christian Lorenzi;John Ashburner;Jocelyne Wable

  • Effortful Listening: The Processing of Degraded Speech Depends Critically on Attention

    Conor J Wild;Afiqah Yusuf;Daryl E Wilson;Jonathan E Peelle;Jonathan E Peelle

  • Do vegetative patients retain aspects of language comprehension? Evidence from fMRI

    Martin R Coleman;Jennifer M Rodd;Matthew H Davis;Ingrid S Johnsrude

  • Leading up the lexical garden path: Segmentation and ambiguity in spoken word recognition

    Matthew H. Davis;William D. Marslen-Wilson;M. Gareth Gaskell

  • Dissociating speech perception and comprehension at reduced levels of awareness

    Matthew H. Davis;Martin R. Coleman;Anthony R. Absalom;Jennifer M. Rodd

  • Spectral and Temporal Processing in Human Auditory Cortex

    Deborah A Hall;Ingrid S Johnsrude;Mark P Haggard;Alan R Palmer

Frequent Co-Authors

Matthew H. Davis
Matthew H. Davis University of Cambridge
Mary Rudner
Mary Rudner Linköping University
Purang Abolmaesumi
Purang Abolmaesumi University of British Columbia
Jerker Rönnberg
Jerker Rönnberg Linköping University
Jennifer M. Rodd
Jennifer M. Rodd University College London
Adriana A. Zekveld
Adriana A. Zekveld Amsterdam UMC
Adrian M. Owen
Adrian M. Owen University of Western Ontario
Richard S. J. Frackowiak
Richard S. J. Frackowiak École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne
Robert P. Carlyon
Robert P. Carlyon University of Cambridge
Kevin G. Munhall
Kevin G. Munhall Queen's University

If you think any of the details on this page are incorrect, let us know.

Report an issue

We appreciate your kind effort to assist us to improve this page, it would be helpful providing us with as much detail as possible in the text box below:

Related Online Degrees & Career Pathways

Expanding your horizons beyond Neuroscience can open up diverse career opportunities in psychology, social work, and therapy. Many students consider pursuing an online psychology degree, but affordability is a key concern. Exploring options with the best psychology degree cost can help minimize student debt and financial stress.

For those interested in a broader impact on community well-being, social work is a rewarding path. There are now many easiest social work programs to get into available online, making it more accessible for prospective students to start their journey.

Those aiming for clinical practice or applied research may consider advanced psychology doctorates. Comparing the cheapest psyd programs ensures you receive a high-quality education without a prohibitive price tag.

If your interests lie in family dynamics and counseling, you might want to pursue an online lmft program to become a licensed marriage and family therapist. These degrees often offer flexible completion timelines, letting you advance toward your goals efficiently.

Best Scientists Citing Ingrid S. Johnsrude

Trending Scientists